Just call me crazy...

[Borachio]

Oh well, in that case, given a Europe with such elastic borders, Europe has a slightly lower population than the US.

Yeah. I can see it all.

But it's true I wouldn't normally count Turkey, Asian Russia (East of the Urals), Georgia, or Azerbiajan as being European.

 

[Gary Childress]

What does anyone think protests will accomplish, raise "awareness?" I don't think they can reverse the grand jury decisions not to indict the officers.

The reason conservatives are politically so successful is because scared and angry conservative voters enact change by voting.
View attachment 386717

So they actually influence politics, while demonstrating college students who think they can change the world get politically dominated by older conservatives.

Granted us older folks are stupid and in need of guidance from the wiser, more knowledgeable younger generation, who are ready to lead us to the promised land I guess. (They should really throw anyone in a retirement home who is over 25.) Or maybe some of the professors up in the ivory towers have it all figured out and that's who the students are listening to?

 

[EgonSpengler]

OK, but when you say "police misconduct" you appear to be overturning the judgment of the grand juries. Are you privy to information on the cases the rest of us aren't? The grand juries examined the evidence and found that it was not "police misconduct". Are we going to resort to mob rule now? If an angry mob decides that a trial gave the wrong verdict should we reverse the decision based on what the mob wants? Isn't that why they have grand juries to begin with, to ensure that sensible justice prevails?

A grand jury isn't a trial, it's a preliminary, evidentiary, or probable cause hearing. Their role is to determine whether an indictment is warranted. Grand juries include no judge and no attorney for the defense, and there is no cross examination of witnesses.

Your "mob rule" questions require a longer reply than I can give right now, but here is a start:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Phrossack]

Granted us older folks are stupid and in need of guidance from the wiser, more knowledgeable younger generation, who are ready to lead us to the promised land I guess. (They should really throw anyone in a retirement home who is over 25.) Or maybe some of the professors up in the ivory towers have it all figured out and that's who the students are listening to?

Assuming you're being sarcastic, no, I don't think younger generations are at all wiser or more knowledgeable--you'll recall me disagreeing with Hygro on that point. My point was that while many liberals, especially young college students, think they can actually change the world by walking in circles chanting slogans, conservative voters tend to think they can affect policy by voting--and so the conservatives tend to have their way unless heavily outnumbered. Usually, politicians can easily ignore protests until they inevitably die down--but they cannot ignore being voted out of office. Conservatives win, liberal college students lose, college students grumble and become cynical adults but don't really do much.

There's nothing they can do to reverse the grand jury decisions, but they could try to unite with protesters and like-minded people across their respective states to campaign for new laws regarding police conduct, or for politicians who run on that platform. But they'd much rather tilt at windmills, fancying themselves part of a latter-day Civil Rights Movement. So they lose.

 

[Smote]

This protest is young people discovering their voice. It's a wonderful thing.

As far as the violence goes:

I've heard a number of reasonable people questioning whether violent protesting is a good thing or a bad thing. They frequently point to the Stonewall Riots as evidence for the long-term morality of violent protesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

Sadly, creating violence can make decisions easier for authorities, because based on simply "minimizing harm" considerations, they can make decisions in the interests of violent protestors.

Nowadays, I tell them its a bad thing, because it's very unfair to the innocents that get damaged. "Do no harm" is a more moral philosophy than the "Ends justify the means" because you never actually have all the knowledge, and you can't know if an apparently morally wrong action is going to lead to good consequences or not. Thus, we shouldn't take unnecessary risks.

However, if government persistently refuses to acknowledge what people want, and conditions are unacceptable, then their hand is forced and violence is justified. But it's not at that point, and I don't think Obama's administration is headed in that direction, considering his public statements on the perceived racism problem.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Wow! Just wow!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Europe

Population of US: 320 million 2014.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Still, I suppose it depends on what you mean by "close".

Ooops, I meant EU, not Europe, and while that is still a bit off it is closer. Better than comparing the US 300 million to some country that has less than 30 million.

 

[Gary Childress]

A grand jury isn't a trial, it's a preliminary, evidentiary, or probable cause hearing. Their role is to determine whether an indictment is warranted. Grand juries include no judge and no attorney for the defense, and there is no cross examination of witnesses.

Maybe I should try to rephrase my question:

When you say "police misconduct" you appear to be overturning the judgment of the grand juries. What evidence leads you to the conclusion that the grand juries made the wrong decision?

 

[MagisterCultuum]

There is no double jeopardy for grand juries.

In theory, protests could persuade prosecutors to impanel a new grand jury to review the evidence. In theory it could convince the prosecutors to try harder to push for a real trial, as opposed to providing stronger arguments in defense of the accused cops.

The chances of actually happening are extremely low though.

 

[gay_Aleks]

This protest is young people discovering their voice. It's a wonderful thing.

As far as the violence goes:

I've heard a number of reasonable people questioning whether violent protesting is a good thing or a bad thing. They frequently point to the Stonewall Riots as evidence for the long-term morality of violent protesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

Sadly, creating violence can make decisions easier for authorities, because based on simply "minimizing harm" considerations, they can make decisions in the interests of violent protestors.

Nowadays, I tell them its a bad thing, because it's very unfair to the innocents that get damaged. "Do no harm" is a more moral philosophy than the "Ends justify the means" because you never actually have all the knowledge, and you can't know if an apparently morally wrong action is going to lead to good consequences or not. Thus, we shouldn't take unnecessary risks.

However, if government persistently refuses to acknowledge what people want, and conditions are unacceptable, then their hand is forced and violence is justified. But it's not at that point, and I don't think Obama's administration is headed in that direction, considering his public statements on the perceived racism problem.

Yeah, and the people they murder is just how they express their free opinion! Truly, unlike other countries where young people don't necessarily throw molotov cocktails at the nearest policeman.

 

[Gary Childress]

Assuming you're being sarcastic, no, I don't think younger generations are at all wiser or more knowledgeable--you'll recall me disagreeing with Hygro on that point. My point was that while many liberals, especially young college students, think they can actually change the world by walking in circles chanting slogans, conservative voters tend to think they can affect policy by voting--and so the conservatives tend to have their way unless heavily outnumbered. Usually, politicians can easily ignore protests until they inevitably die down--but they cannot ignore being voted out of office. Conservatives win, liberal college students lose, college students grumble and become cynical adults but don't really do much.

There's nothing they can do to reverse the grand jury decisions, but they could try to unite with protesters and like-minded people across their respective states to campaign for new laws regarding police conduct, or for politicians who run on that platform. But they'd much rather tilt at windmills, fancying themselves part of a latter-day Civil Rights Movement. So they lose.

I don't know if it qualifies as "sarcasm". Just trying to "get with the program" and figure out what I'm supposed to be doing. It's certainly possible I should be cheering the rioters on.

 

[Hygro]

Do the police just start "attacking" them for no reason? Sounds like there was a lot of vandalism going on.

This one is pretty mild as police responses to Berkeley students go, only light beatings and gassing in response to incredibly peaceful protesters.


Link to video.

 

[Colonel]

This one is pretty mild as police responses to Berkeley students go, only light beatings and gassing in response to incredibly peaceful protesters.


Link to video.

Never mind blocking the interstate, never mind throwing explosives at a cop car, never mind trying to light another cop car on fire, never mind throwing rocks at police officers.

Yea, they're peaceful alright.

 

[Gary Childress]

This one is pretty mild as police responses to Berkeley students go, only light beatings and gassing in response to incredibly peaceful protesters.


Link to video.

Does this happen all the time, police poking at the students? I saw an article that described some elements around Berkeley as "full time demonstrators". Do they hold a lot of demonstrations?

 

[Gary Childress]

This is a report from 12/6/14, when your "peaceful demonstration" video is purported to be from. Doesn't sound like a "peaceful" night. Do we know that this video is from before or after the demonstrations had turned violent elsewhere? Maybe the police were cracking down because of what was going on in other parts of town?

Protests turned violent in Berkeley, California, on Saturday night when some masked demonstrators smashed windows while others hurled rocks at police.

But as some broke windows at nearby businesses, other protesters implored them to stop the violence.

Police in riot gear lined the streets while others hovered nearby on motorbikes.

“A small portion of protesters have been violent. They started throwing rocks and other projectiles at our officers,” said Jennifer Coats, a spokeswoman for the Berkeley Police Department

http://ktla.com/2014/12/06/masked-p...-police-as-protests-in-berkeley-turn-violent/

 

[Hygro]

Never mind blocking the interstate, never mind throwing explosives at a cop car, never mind trying to light another cop car on fire, never mind throwing rocks at police officers.

Yea, they're peaceful alright.

I like how you put "blocking the interstate" in your list of violent actions

The other things, I didn't hear of the explosives or attempted arson, and there were a couple of people apparently throwing rocks. Tonight, a guy was giving out marshmellows saying "if you want to throw something, throw these".

The police here respond to peaceful protest with about as much violence as they can get away with. It's always a few cops who are particularly emotional at these things who do most of the aggression.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Maybe I should try to rephrase my question.

When you say "police misconduct" you appear to be overturning the judgment of the grand juries. What evidence leads you to the conclusion that the grand juries made the wrong decision?

It sounds like you're asking about the specific instances of Brown and Garner, when the demonstrations are about the larger problem. Just a few, recent news stories:

The funeral for Akai Gurley was Saturday. Mr. Gurley was "accidentally" gunned down by a police officer in the stairwell of this apartment building on November 20th. The officer who killed Mr. Gurley was doing an unauthorized "vertical patrol" of the building at the time, with his gun drawn.

It's been revealed that the officer who killed Tamir Rice on November 22nd had been fired by another police department for incompetence before being hired by Cleveland, but that Cleveland has no policy of reviewing applicants' previous service records. Tamir had been reported to 911 service for wielding a toy gun, but the 911 operator didn't tell the responding officers that. I cannot bring myself to call Tamir "Mr. Rice" because he was twelve years old.

On December 4th, Attorney General Holder announced the results of a 2-year Justice Department investigation of the Cleveland police department. This particular investigation was launched after the November 2012 shootings of Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams. Police fired 137 shots into the suspects' car, hitting Mr. Russell 23 times and Ms. Williams 24. The unarmed couple were homeless drug addicts; the event was sparked when their car backfired and an officer thought he was being shot at.

On December 7th, a Massachusetts State Police officer reportedly used pepper spray on a protestor who wouldn't move out of his way. The officer is under investigation.

We have determined that there is reasonable cause to believe that the Cleveland Division of Police engages in a pattern or practice of using excessive force – in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and as a result of systemic deficiencies, including insufficient accountability, inadequate training and equipment, ineffective policies, and inadequate engagement with the community.

And if you're wondering what the hell's wrong with Cleveland,

Over the last five fiscal years, our Civil Rights Division has opened more than 20 investigations into police departments across the country – more than twice as many as were opened in the previous five fiscal years. We are currently enforcing no fewer than 15 agreements with law enforcement agencies – including eight consent decrees – to correct unconstitutional policing practices. And we have seen, many times over, that this model can work. Reform is underway in New Orleans; Seattle; Albuquerque; Portland, Oregon; East Haven Connecticut; Puerto Rico; and Warren, Ohio.

He didn't even mention Newark. Other cities have been cited by other organizations, such as the recent Massachusetts ACLU report on the Boston Police Department. One could go on all day about these events; there's too much to do much more than scratch the surface here.

 

[Colonel]

I like how you put "blocking the interstate" in your list of violent actions

The other things, I didn't hear of the explosives or attempted arson, and there were a couple of people apparently throwing rocks. Tonight, a guy was giving out marshmellows saying "if you want to throw something, throw these".

The police here respond to peaceful protest with about as much violence as they can get away with. It's always a few cops who are particularly emotional at these things who do most of the aggression.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...gassed-hurl-explosives-cops-article-1.2037430

http://ktla.com/2014/12/07/proteste...o-block-freeway-light-patrol-car-on-fire-chp/

http://fox8.com/2014/12/08/proteste...hway-throw-explosives-at-officers-police-say/


Just incase you didn't trust one source, see google for dozens more.

Violent looters who are willing to assault, throw rocks, explosives, and attempt to commit arson should be shot in the streets like the dogs they are. This non-sense across the country now needs to be dealt with a heavy hand to put an end to it.

 

[Gary Childress]

It sounds like you're asking about the specific instances of Brown and Garner, when the demonstrations are about the larger problem. Just a few, recent news stories:

The funeral for Akai Gurley was Saturday. Mr. Gurley was "accidentally" gunned down by a police officer in the stairwell of this apartment building on November 20th. The officer who killed Mr. Gurley was doing an unauthorized "vertical patrol" of the building at the time, with his gun drawn.

It's been revealed that the officer who killed Tamir Rice on November 22nd had been fired by another police department for incompetence before being hired by Cleveland, but that Cleveland has no policy of reviewing applicants' previous service records. Tamir had been reported to 911 service for wielding a toy gun, but the 911 operator didn't tell the responding officers that. I cannot bring myself to call Tamir "Mr. Rice" because he was twelve years old.

On December 4th, Attorney General Holder announced the results of a 2-year Justice Department investigation of the Cleveland police department. This particular investigation was launched after the November 2012 shootings of Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams. Police fired 137 shots into the suspects' car, hitting Mr. Russell 23 times and Ms. Williams 24. The unarmed couple were homeless drug addicts; the event was sparked when their car backfired and an officer thought he was being shot at.

On December 7th, a Massachusetts State Police officer reportedly used pepper spray on a protestor who wouldn't move out of his way. The officer is under investigation.

And if you're wondering what the hell's wrong with Cleveland,

He didn't even mention Newark. Other cities have been cited by other organizations, such as the recent Massachusetts ACLU report on the Boston Police Department. One could go on all day about these events; there's too much to do much more than scratch the surface here.

I guess I'll never get an answer to my question. So now we're jumping to another police shooting (which is apparently still under investigation). We don't know yet what the verdict will be on the Gurley case.

I'm so confused. Aren't police involved in shootings all the time? Has something changed? They carry guns and often work in dangerous environments. Isn't that why it's always a good idea to cooperate with them? Obviously I'm just ignorant and need the enlightenment of "gangbanger culture".

It seems to me we could put police in bunny suits with a camera and there will still be police shootings. These cases are taken one at a time and reviewed by the justice system. the justice system appears to be working fine so far to me. Do we really need street mobs playing amateur people's court demanding justice on cases that are being handled by the system as they were meant to be handled? Do we really need brats at Berkeley taunting police on the streets every other Saturday night because they want to impress their dates? Protesting seems to have become like some sort of rite of initiation to college for some (alongside guzzling a beer bong until you pass out).

Most of the officers I have met in my life seem to be there to protect and serve. The ones I have met (even the ones who have given me traffic tickets) seem to be good citizens in most cases (albeit mere mortals). Yes there are also bad officers. That's why they have juries and judges and review cases instead of turning defendants over to angry, irrational, lynch mobs.

Now I don't live in Cleveland so I can't testify to Cleveland police. I don't deal in black market cigarettes or attack officers when they try to detain me so maybe there is a side of the justice system I am hopelessly ignorant about. In any case if push comes to shove I guess I'll side with police and not this guy:



But that's the way we mentally ill people are. We think erratic, strange and nonsensical things which normal, sensible, well adjusted people like Al Sharpton (illiterate that he may be) don't normally do. They should really lock me up and throw away the key. I'm having way too much difficulty adjusting to rational contemporary society.

 

[Hygro]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...gassed-hurl-explosives-cops-article-1.2037430

http://ktla.com/2014/12/07/proteste...o-block-freeway-light-patrol-car-on-fire-chp/

http://fox8.com/2014/12/08/proteste...hway-throw-explosives-at-officers-police-say/


Just incase you didn't trust one source, see google for dozens more.

Violent looters who are willing to assault, throw rocks, explosives, and attempt to commit arson should be shot in the streets like the dogs they are. This non-sense across the country now needs to be dealt with a heavy hand to put an end to it.

So the local news affiliates are all repeating the same line from the police spokesperson without qualifying and I'm supposed to take it seriously?

Meanwhile you got to see a 10 minute video of peaceful, non-looting, non-vandalizing students being attacked by officers but it's okay because somewhere else by different people there was looting and <finger quotes>explosives</finger quotes>

 

[Colonel]

So the local news affiliates are all repeating the same line from the police spokesperson without qualifying and I'm supposed to take it seriously?

Meanwhile you got to see a 10 minute video of peaceful, non-looting, non-vandalizing students being attacked by officers but it's okay because somewhere else by different people there was looting and <finger quotes>explosives</finger quotes>

Every news outlet that covered it stated the exact same story. Notice one of those isn't local also. As I said I refer you to google for further news articles covering the violence. I saw plenty of non-violent protest videos throughout Ferguson as well, you know what that simply isn't what is really going on in this country. The horrible thing about all these anti-police "protests" that are occurring around the country is that they draw out a significant criminal element which turns most of the protests to some degree of violence.